Regarding EMC and HACMP I must respectfully disagree.
HACMP (classic and ES) works fine with EMC on our systems, and its even
easier with PowerPath.
Where things get seriously interesting is when you try to use EMC's
splittable mirror software "Timefinder".
Don't even toy with the remotest possibility of trying to make this work
within an HA cluster.
It is possible to use the mirror ('BCV') devices on different nodes in the
same SP frame for example, but the node where you varyon the BCV must not be
in the same logical HA cluster as the Standard disks.
I should add that unless you're:
i) A mean script writer and
ii) A handy C programmer and
iii) A pretty useful ODM hacker, you might struggle.
It took me 18 months to build our solution...
Senior AIX Systems Administrator,
(Please note: all newsgroup offerings are made in a personal
capacity and in no way are the responsibility of my employer)
p.s. Did you know that "AIX Operating System" is an anagram of "Mega *
> > > 1. Is EMC really worth the extra?
> > It depends what do you need. If you have extra money to spend, get EMC.
> > Since EMC is still the industry leader for now.
> HACMP + EMC = headache.
> You WILL have problems if you use HACMP with EMC systems. Guaranteed. It
> just doesn't work. Ghost disks, failed resource takeovers, all sorts of
> IBM is...unmotivated...to make HACMP work well with EMC disks, and EMC is
> apparently unable to help.
> Forget about redundant data paths (i.e. EMC PowerPath or IBM's Data Path
> Optimizer, aka Subsystem Device Driver) if you're using HACMP - it's not
> If you want to make your HACMP cluster work well, you're best off sticking
> with SSA.
> If you must have HACMP and you must have a storage server, go with the
> ESS. IBM is orders of magnitude more motivated to make HACMP play nice
> with ESS than it ever will be with EMC.
> Scott Ellerman
> The opinions expressed above are solely my own, and not those of Nortel
> Networks or IBM.